Popular topics:

TOC Recommended Reading

Today we are the start of a digital consumer offer but it is in the main based on yesterday’s physical cost model, processes and perceptions. Merely taking the finished book and generating a digital rendition that mirrors the physical one is what music did with CDs. Is it logical to merely replicate the book and create just another rendition? We don’t envisage the same demand change as music experienced in selling just fragments (tracks), but it is possible to see the selling of installments or part works, where all the complete ‘book’ may not be bought. (Via the Reading 2.0 list)

I think that there is a technological gap between what readers would like in the perfect ereader and what can actually be done. If you don’t like LCD screens, then you are limited by refresh rates and the inability of eink technology to actually perform some multi function device programs. If you don’t like to be limited by refresh rates, want a backlight, and ability to play video, browse the web, and even do a lot of typing (or editing of manuscripts), then eInk devices aren’t for you. (Via Electric Alphabet)

Anyone who uses Chrome will technically own the copyright, but who needs copyright when the Chrome user effectively gives up her right to distribute this content in all perpetuity and without royalties? So if Joyce Carol Oates is using Chrome and types an email to someone, she “owns” the copyright. But Google has the right to use anything that Ms. Oates types into Chrome for any purpose. Google responds. (Via Jose Alonso Furtado’s Twitter stream)